I am curious how perspective employers would compare and contrast the two situations.

They both sound equally awesome to me. And given that they seem so equal, I would say that whichever of the 2 scenarios leaves less debt is the one I would pick. So I guess I would go with CCNMVP if I knew for sure I could finish in the top 10% and on LR. But I hope you aren't using this as a reflection of reality. The students at CCNMVP are but a mere 2 or 3 LSAT points away from being HYS students themselves. There would be absolutely no difference in overall student-body intelligence. So it would be pretty silly to assume that, if one could finish top 1/3 at HYS, that said person would be top 10% at CCNMVP.

I know you cannt assume that you will place higher simply because you go to a lower ranked school.

Because of this, many people would say go to the better ranked school because that is guaranteed.

However, it seems like the best of the best go to HYS thus, if you are WL accepted (a.k.a probably borderline numbers), would it be smarter to go to a school where your probability of success may be higher such as CCNMVP?

lawyerwannabe wrote:However, it seems like the best of the best go to HYS thus, if you are WL accepted (a.k.a probably borderline numbers), would it be smarter to go to a school where your probability of success may be higher such as CCNMVP?

No, because the true difference in student quality is something like a tenth of a GPA point and 2-3 LSAT points. It's not enough to make the student body dramatically different, which means it won't be dramatically harder competition at the better school. This is why people are saying you shouldn't assume you'll make top 10% at one group of schools but not the other. If you can only make top 25% at HYS at best, then that's probably about how you'd do at CCN, too.

lawyerwannabe wrote:However, it seems like the best of the best go to HYS thus, if you are WL accepted (a.k.a probably borderline numbers), would it be smarter to go to a school where your probability of success may be higher such as CCNMVP?

Whatever small amount CCNMVP is easier than HYS, is more than made up for by firms valuing HYS over CCN.

Also it seems like even the bottom of HYS is competitive for jobs, while bottom at CCNMVP isn't.

joemoviebuff wrote:To strictly answer your question without reading anything additional into it, I'd rather be top 10 and on law review at CCNMVP.

Me too, although I MIGHT make an exception for YLS since it's such an academia powerhouse.

Yeah, I think Yale is the only one that I would say the advantages are great enough to pass up LR, etc. Yale is just head and shoulders ahead in the most prestigious outlets. When it comes to that group more generally, CCN Law Review is probably in a better position if we are just talking about how far up the V-food chain you get to go. Mere top third at Harvard is not outdoing the Columbia LR candidate when it comes to looking for a V10 job in NYC.

I am curious how perspective employers would compare and contrast the two possible two candidates.

Get in and then worry about it.

I am by no means saying that I will be in this situation to choose between HYS and CCNMVP. I will count myself fortunate if I can get anyone of CCN or MVP. I was simply curious and wondering what people thought.

lawyerwannabe wrote:This seems to make the most sense to me. Also, I never thought about the small difference in numbers that separate HYS from CCNMVP because everyone on here puts HYS head and shoulders above CCNMVP.

The reason people put HYS "head and shoulders above" the rest of the T14 is that when it comes to hiring, employers do. It's not a reflection of the student bodies, which are actually very similar, at all.

lawyerwannabe wrote:This seems to make the most sense to me. Also, I never thought about the small difference in numbers that separate HYS from CCNMVP because everyone on here puts HYS head and shoulders above CCNMVP.

The reason people put HYS "head and shoulders above" the rest of the T14 is that when it comes to hiring, employers do. It's not a reflection of the student bodies, which are actually very similar, at all.

It is good to note that there are fewer and fewer applicants at each LSAT score as you go up, culminating with 50-75 applicants who have a 180. It's not as simple as the difference between 170 and 172 being equivalent to the difference between 172 and 174.

d34dluk3 wrote:It is good to note that there are fewer and fewer applicants at each LSAT score as you go up, culminating with 50-75 applicants who have a 180. It's not as simple as the difference between 170 and 172 being equivalent to the difference between 172 and 174.

Yes, but Harvard's median is 173, and Columbia's is 172. Harvard's 75th is 176, and Columbia's is 175. We're talking about a student body that honestly on the average just got one or two fewer wrong answers on the LSAT. Yes, the folks at Harvard are rare, but the folks at CCN are only very slightly less rare.

I am curious how perspective employers would compare and contrast the two possible two candidates.

I think you are a bit misinformed, grades have nothing to do with getting on the LR at Yale. LR is open to anyone in the school, you want on you take their entrance exam during the summer between years and if you pass you are on. You want on any of their other journals and you simply sign up. I can't speak of the Harvard or Standford... so I don't know their methodology but anyone in Yale that is willing to spend a couple of days looking for mistakes in their sample and using the citation guide will get on.... Of course one would wonder why you bothered since being on the LR just sucks a lot of your time up doing mindless citation work.

Being or not being on the LR doesn't matter at Yale nor do grades... at Harvard they now use a forced curve so there really isn't a middle third you really would have a top 10% a bottom 10% and 80% in the middle.